Are Qigong Forms BS?

[Taomeow]

TM don't you love it when the right question appears?

Who doesn't?..

 

You don't see me contributing to the "foreskin restoration" thread --

 

I could, but I would have to turn East Asian for this one... I've read that in East Asia, unlike in the West, it is generally understood that it is the responsibility of the questioning party to understand, not of the answering party to be clear. (I read about it in relation to miscommunications between air traffic controllers and pilots in Japan -- a pilot is occasionally reported as walking into the traffic control room upon landing and punching the controller in the eye after being questioned too persistently by the latter.)

[dawei]

To flesh out the question a little further (keeping in mind this is a question, and not a statement):

 

Is it possible that the results of qigong are a result of the practicioner's mind rather than the qigong itself, and the qigong forms simply facilitate the mind's creation of these?

If you accept that Qigong is sometimes separated into Nei Gong (Internal) and Wai Gong (external), then forms belong to the latter and are considered safer and easier to feel results but ultimately less effective at producing a higher level of energy.

 

Therefore, it would stand to reason that Nei Gong (internal generating of Qi) can generate more effect with no movement but it takes more practice (except for those gifted with it). In my example of using an index finger in one hand to feel it in the other hand; the second step is to use someone else's hand; the third step is to use no hand, just your mind. The movement helps sync up the body faster but the mind alone can do.

 

I would say in general, the mind facilitates. But, our definition of 'mind' may differ. I think with practice, one is developing their innate mind (lower brain; lower dan tian) to coordinate and facilitate this and that is when such effect gets more pronounced. Meaning, you can only get so much from just using your upper mind.

 

Another way of questioning which may be interesting is: Is there a way to generate results without the mind?

 

The simple answer is yes, since qi constantly flows or we would not be typing any words. If you have had acupuncture and felt qi flow as a result, that is not just your mind producing it. If you have had someone with energy abilities move YOUR qi without even touching you, that is not just your mind either.

 

The only forms of meditation I practice are Qi oriented. So I cannot speak for experiences which are more empty oriented. I have a friend who did 3 hours of transcendental meditation a day. I asked if he ever felt Qi flow and he said no. I asked exactly what he did for breathing and he was going into slower and slower breathes which also because longer and longer, into his lungs. So he was generating incredibly large lungs which pushed downward. This is generally not the method of Qi meditation which breaths down into the stomach.

 

You can play with breathing into your stomach or diaphragm. Place one hand over that area and another over the other area to make sure the movement is only to the former. You can also breath in through your body. The palms, bottom of feet and top of head are the five gates, but you can breath through anywhere if you put your mind to it. While I did mean literally put your mind to it, sometimes a spot spontaneously opens without the mind there. And sounds can trigger that too.

Edited November 20, 2010 by dawei

[ralis]

The outdated idea that channels, meridians etc. are part of a linear array, is a fragmented view. The human energy fields is complex and non linear. Therefore, I agree with GIH. Will post more next week.

[NeiChuan]

To flesh out the question a little further (keeping in mind this is a question, and not a statement):

 

Is it possible that the results of qigong are a result of the practicioner's mind rather than the qigong itself, and the qigong forms simply facilitate the mind's creation of these?

 

By way of a story: perhaps there was an ancient Taoist sage who learned the benefits of non-attachment, cultivating positive feelings, mindfulness, and acceptance. Now he goes and tells people they should do these things, but they all scratch their heads. So he says, "Here is an ancient Tiger-Warrior form. If you do this, then these feelings will arise." People who believe this take the form and achieve the result. Over time, people ascribe a certain power to the form.

 

In fact, there is a famous story involving Levi-Straus* (an anthropologist) who had his cynical assistance learn how to cure people by hiding objects in his mouth and sucking them out. He discovered that the people were cured, even though his assistant didn't believe.

 

To take it further, perhaps dan tiens, meridians, nadis, chakras, and all of this are created by the practitioner, rather than discovered. Accordingly, one who learns according to yoga will discover the nadis and chakras of yoga. One who learns qigong will discover dan tiens and meridians.

 

Of course, all this may require an adjustment to the view that mind is simply an epiphenomenon of matter.

 

 

* I remember it was Levi-Strauss, but I may be misremembering.

 

Haha That's a great post.

 

Yeah sometimes I think through practice we're actually creating these dan tiens.

 

But I know they exist already in some sense, so perhaps we just shape the energies to make them more present.

 

Interesting post though.

[宁]

Who doesn't?..

 

You don't see me contributing to the "foreskin restoration" thread --

 

I could, but I would have to turn East Asian for this one... I've read that in East Asia, unlike in the West, it is generally understood that it is the responsibility of the questioning party to understand, not of the answering party to be clear. (I read about it in relation to miscommunications between air traffic controllers and pilots in Japan -- a pilot is occasionally reported as walking into the traffic control room upon landing and punching the controller in the eye after being questioned too persistently by the latter.)

 

That reminds me of a brief introduction to a Chinese novel, written sometime in the beginning of the 20st century, where the author feels compelled to reassure the reader that if he, the reader, doesn't understand what he writes, it's only because he, the reader, is not educated enough... Mind you, we're speaking about an ordinary novel...

 

L1

[Taomeow]

That reminds me of a brief introduction to a Chinese novel, written sometime in the beginning of the 20st century, where the author feels compelled to reassure the reader that if he, the reader, doesn't understand what he writes, it's only because he, the reader, is not educated enough... Mind you, we're speaking about an ordinary novel...

 

L1

 

Right! I've seen very similar ideas all over Nabokov's novels (well, he wasn't Chinese but he had Tartar blood ), and somewhere therein it is expressed explicitly -- or rather metaphorically: something like... well... I spread a lush, precious, richly decorated, multicolored carpet of a most intricate design and most exquisite workmanship in the hall wherein I invite my dear reader... and if dear reader stumbles at the threshold and gets entangled in the folds of the carpet and falls flat on his face and gets a bump on his forehead, that's his business, not mine.

[forestofemptiness]

Neither English, nor any other language exists other than as a mental construct--- it is a made up pattern that we are able to learn. English does not exist apart from or until the arising of English speakers. With qigong, the idea is that the meridians and dan tiens exist independently.

 

And if dan tiens and meridians exist independently, then one would think there would be more consistency in their description. I've found descriptions vary widely even within a culture, much less talking across cultures.

 

 

Functions are not limited to gross anatomical organs. Instead many of them (many thousands of them, to be precise) can be the outcome of particular configurations of processes taking place within or between organs.

 

E.g., your ability to read in English is the outcome of a particular configuration of neuronal connections established between your eyes, your visual cortex, and your neocortex. This stable and specific configuration (which won't work for reading Sanskrit though) is the outcome of training imposed on a trainable system open to molding into a unit of meaningful and useful function. So your ability to read is a co-creation between your innate biological machinery and the specific shaping of its configuration achieved by learning.

[Taomeow]

Neither English, nor any other language exists other than as a mental construct--- it is a made up pattern that we are able to learn. English does not exist apart from or until the arising of English speakers. With qigong, the idea is that the meridians and dan tiens exist independently.

 

And if dan tiens and meridians exist independently, then one would think there would be more consistency in their description. I've found descriptions vary widely even within a culture, much less talking across cultures.

 

Interesting point.

 

English, the language of the Angles, or in another spelling Angels, is as real as the stars whence it comes. Are the stars real? Is DNA real? Language acquisition machinery is encoded in human DNA. WHICH language to acquire isn't, but "some human language" as part of normal human functioning is.

 

A "mental construct" is physical -- it consists of a particular physical configuration of neuronal clusters and dendrites connecting them. The whole group designated to a particular task and only to this task functions as a bona fide organ and is present anatomically too. The configurational organ for the English language in your system is as different from your liver as your liver is different from your nose, which doesn't make any one of them unreal simply because it is "unlike" the other. Your nose is not just the external protrusion of flesh -- it is also the olfactory nerves going to your brain and corresponding therein to an "inner nose" where all of your smelling action really takes place. Just because you don't have (because you don't need) a specific protruding organ for "human language" doesn't make it unreal. The "human language" part of your brain and the "nose" part of your brain are anatomically indistinguishable from each other, and differ only in function.

 

There are no functional "mental constructs" not backed up by physical, anatomical, physiological reality. Unlike fantasies, wishful thinking, daydreaming, etc., that form clusters of meaning but do not form clusters of function and typically begin and end in the neocortex, function-organ constructs that involve interactions with the body's other organs and systems AND with the outside world are systemically connected to your whole body (e.g., I'm a kinesthetic speller and store grammar in the gut, as a physical image of the word rather than auditory or visual) and to the, um, universe. When you speak English, all English speakers understand. Angels too.

 

As for consistency in description of dantiens and meridians, well, meridians are described with precise consistency in classic TCM, and practitioners of acupuncture used to pass their exams by sticking needles in a hollow clay model of the human body with five to eight hundred holes made at the acupoints sites, sealed with wax. The model was filled with water. The practitioner who was taking the exam had to stick all the needles so that water would start squirting.

 

It is a bit different with dantiens because a dantien is way more complex than a meridian, and way more complex than riding a bicycle. It's just not as cut and dry. It's more like something like your "humanity" -- can you define your humanity in clear, precise, specific, "scientific" terms that won't contradict those in which I define mine?.. If you can, you can do something very deeply complex and advanced and basically miraculous. But if you can't, it doesn't mean you have no "humanity."

[goldisheavy]

Of course we have to keep in mind GIH that yours is the opinion of someone who self-admittedly hasn't ever really trained in qigong for a proper length of time (i.e. 3+ years continuous years).

 

Regardless of conceptual theories, there is definitely something to be said for trusting the process and keep practicing until the results are self-apparent. Fortunately the qigong I train (Ba Bao) gives immediate benefits to strength and flexibility whilst you develop the sensitivity to become aware of the "other stuff".

 

 

I never said qi gong gives no results. Any sustained application of intent will yield some kind of result. When I said that qi gong is partly bullshit I didn't mean it gives no results. I meant it's unnecessarily narrowly described, it uses a lot of stuff that's presented as just the only one possible form of the truth, etc. I other words, all qi gong materials I've seen promote a subtle delusion on some level.

 

There are ways to get all the same results as in qi gong without the limitations of qi gong. That's accomplishable by anyone who understands the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense.

 

A dumb yet fastidious and determined person can build a combustion engine based on a schematic. By someone who understands laws of physics at a more general level can build an infinite multitude of engines of which combustion engines are a subclass, and such person can build many different combustion engines instead of just one.

 

Now, some people just want to get from point A to point B. They want a certain effect and really don't give a crap about how things actually work. That's not me and I hope that's not any serious spiritual seeker. So for people with similar aspirations to me out there I gave that warning.

 

It's the difference between following a recipe and being a chef on a metaphysical level. Qi gong is deluded in the sense that when people learn one recipe, they can certainly show amazing results because a tasty recipe is still a tasty recipe, but then they pretend to be a chef, which is a different category of a sentient being with different aspirations from someone who studies qi gong.

 

Qi gong requires absolutely no wisdom. It requires some sensitivity, common sense, and just lots and lots and lots of practice. A dumb but diligent and careful person can be a big success in qi gong. Such person will still be an idiot though.

Edited November 21, 2010 by goldisheavy

[goldisheavy]

To flesh out the question a little further (keeping in mind this is a question, and not a statement):

 

Is it possible that the results of qigong are a result of the practicioner's mind rather than the qigong itself, and the qigong forms simply facilitate the mind's creation of these?

 

Precisely! Except, what is "other than mind"? What is "qigong itself"? I don't understand how qi gong can be itself and outside mind at the same time.

 

By way of a story: perhaps there was an ancient Taoist sage who learned the benefits of non-attachment, cultivating positive feelings, mindfulness, and acceptance. Now he goes and tells people they should do these things, but they all scratch their heads. So he says, "Here is an ancient Tiger-Warrior form. If you do this, then these feelings will arise." People who believe this take the form and achieve the result. Over time, people ascribe a certain power to the form.

 

I don't think qi gong is like that at all. Qi gong has specific and down to earth goals which are based on somewhat deluded assumptions. For example there is an assumption that energy is something substantial and that it can be accumulated. There is an assumption that energy must flow through vessels, which are called meridians. In fact energy is neither substantial nor does it require any kind of vessels. It would be OK to creatively admit the existence of vessels as creative and playful, but qigong people don't think of them in that way. They think these vessels actually exist regardless of beliefs, and that perception of these vessels is neither creative nor playful.

 

It's a play of consciousness which isn't acknowledged for what it is -- a play.

 

So the goals of qi gong are improved health, and improved battle prowess and not any kind of fuzzy feelings. Wisdom is not the goal of qi gong either. Qi gong can be used to keep the body warm in the winter and cool in the summer. It has this kind of practical and down the earth application.

 

So when qi gong is taught, I don't think the master who teaches it deceives the student in order to use qi gong as a vehicle for something higher.

 

To take it further, perhaps dan tiens, meridians, nadis, chakras, and all of this are created by the practitioner, rather than discovered.

 

Exactly.

 

You should also look up a relatively recent medical study that found that fake acupressure (or was it acupuncture?) gave the same beneficial result as the authentic one.

Edited November 21, 2010 by goldisheavy

[zerostao]

It's fun & productive to jam free-form, but...

 

The stuff I learned in shing-yi, shape and movement of body, was specific and produced real power and there was no way I'd've ever guessed nor experimented my way into those specific exercises w/ principles intact. And, corrections by teacher along the way as my body gained capacity to address each exercise more deeply, w/ out that - lost in the woods. There are real systems out there.

 

Even my current experimentations (made up stuff), both in movement and stillness practices, are more informed by principle than they were years ago - and are correspondingly more effective.

would you agree that before you can create your own effective forms, you need to attain a certain level of proficiency in moving energy that usually takes years to accomplish?

[Stigweard]

I never said qi gong gives no results. Any sustained application of intent will yield some kind of result. When I said that qi gong is partly bullshit I didn't mean it gives no results. I meant it's unnecessarily narrowly described, it uses a lot of stuff that's presented as just the only one possible form of the truth, etc. I other words, all qi gong materials I've seen promote a subtle delusion on some level.

 

Heya GIH ... I certainly hear you and, in some cases, I will agree that some qigong systems have been narrowly described. Perhaps it is an attempt by the lineage holders and/or marketers to make their system sound unique and somehow superior. I am sure we could find examples of this

 

Let's have a closer look at some of your comments though:

 

The bad thing is that you don't get wiser about phenomena and you still follow things as if they are real.

 

That is incorrect and practice will reveal it so. Through my practice I have seen the most tangible link between my mind-content and the experiences I have both within my body and within my general life. If we understand the fundamental causation of phenomena through direct experiencing of it, that equates as wisdom to me.

 

There are ways to get all the same results as in qi gong without the limitations of qi gong. That's accomplishable by anyone who understands the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense.

 

A dumb yet fastidious and determined person can build a combustion engine based on a schematic. By someone who understands laws of physics at a more general level can build an infinite multitude of engines of which combustion engines are a subclass, and such person can build many different combustion engines instead of just one.

 

I agree with you. But what about the poor sod who doesn't "understand the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense"? Again I will emphasize that proper qigong teaches this.

 

Think of it like training wheels. First we give ourselves a narrow set of guidelines in which to grow and learn. Then as our ability to maintain our own equilibrium develops and our knowledge of the principles grows we can do away with the training wheels and ride under our own steam.

 

Same thing ... we learn a specific set of practices that both teach us the fundamental principles and gives us the benefits of the practice. Eventually, with due practice, we understand the general principles and understand the uses of intent and then we can "free-wheel" it on our own and don't necessarily have to conform to or depend on the narrow practices any more.

 

It's also like learning music (or anything really) ... first you learn the scales and you diligently practice the classics of the masters. Then, when you have enough understanding of the principles, you can compose your own music.

 

The practice of scales and the forms that have been created by the Masters that have come before us comes first though.

 

Qi gong is deluded in the sense that when people learn one recipe, they can certainly show amazing results because a tasty recipe is still a tasty recipe, but then they pretend to be a chef, which is a different category of a sentient being with different aspirations from someone who studies qi gong.

 

This is a rash and ill-considered judgement. You are saying that because a few people falsely claim to be qigong masters when they have only learned one form then all qigong is delusional.

 

It would be like me saying: "All music is deluded because there are people who learn to play one song well and then pretend to be world-class musicians."

 

Any rational person would view that statement as BS ... yours falls into the same category.

 

Qi gong requires absolutely no wisdom. It requires some sensitivity, common sense, and just lots and lots and lots of practice. A dumb but diligent and careful person can be a big success in qi gong. Such person will still be an idiot though.

 

LOL ... sorry my friend again you reveal the fact that you haven't trained enough to form a proper evaluation. I know you esteem your contemplative and cognitive abilities to view a thing and believe you know it, and to be honest with you I admire most of your insights. This is one of the exceptions however.

 

You need LOTS of sensitivity, yes you need common sense, and most definitely you need lots and lots of practice. However, without the wisdom and discipline of being able to maintain your intent, awareness, and attention impeccably then all you are doing is calisthenics.

 

Perhaps we differ in what we believe wisdom to be.

 

The dogmas of qigong are definitely bullshit. For example, meridians, dan tien, all that is bullshit. It's all optional and mind-made. You can put your energy storage point into any location. It doesn't have to be dan tien. You can even put it outside the body, or even inside some abstract space that doesn't coincide with physical space at all. It doesn't have to be a point. It doesn't have to be any shape. It can be a square or a pyramid or a sphere. The very idea of "storage" is bullshit to begin with. So all the configurations, locations, directions of flows, all that is cultural, conditional and individual. People cannot accept such shifty things as real though, so they try to physicalize them by making these things dogmatically solid, in other words, dan tien is always in the same place in the stomach, etc. This gives things an aura of physicality, solidity and then people can believe in these things given their delusions which expect solidity everywhere.

 

When building an internal combustion piston engine, is the piston optional? Is the intake camshaft optional? Are they delusional?

 

Of course not, and neither are the components and mechanics of qigong. Take it or leave it.

 

If you want just see them as training tools and guidelines for the beginner until they can learn to fly under their own steam.

 

However, all the mechanics are there due to eons of empirical observation, research, and collection of data. My experiences confirm the mechanics and framework that has been provided and that's good enough for me to find validity in the mechanics and inspires me to study and practice more.

 

[pilot]

The outdated idea that channels, meridians etc. are part of a linear array, is a fragmented view. The human energy fields is complex and non linear. Therefore, I agree with GIH. Will post more next week.

I look forward to your post, and in what way you mean non-linear, as well as to the source of your information. I find it a worthwhile question even if I anticipate it to be short-lived.

[goldisheavy]

Heya GIH ... I certainly hear you and, in some cases, I will agree that some qigong systems have been narrowly described. Perhaps it is an attempt by the lineage holders and/or marketers to make their system sound unique and somehow superior. I am sure we could find examples of this

 

Let's have a closer look at some of your comments though:

 

The bad thing is that you don't get wiser about phenomena and you still follow things as if they are real.

 

That is incorrect and practice will reveal it so. Through my practice I have seen the most tangible link between my mind-content and the experiences I have both within my body and within my general life. If we understand the fundamental causation of phenomena through direct experiencing of it, that equates as wisdom to me.

 

I agree. Qi gong has *some* value in wisdom development. I should have said it's not focused on wisdom. It's focused on results. Qi gong practitioner wants practical results, like for example, being warm in the winter, or being able to stop the bleeding from a wound and so on.

 

Let's take carpentry for example. Generally speaking carpentry is very useful. I think that's pretty obvious. Who wouldn't appreciate a nice house or a small wooden bridge over a river and so on? Of course carpentry gives practical results. Moreover, if you practice carpentry with attention and dedication, there is also a chance you'll wise up just like that butcher in Chuang Tzu. Still, how many carpenters are wise? I'd say an overwhelming majority are just ordinary people without any interesting or noteworthy qualities.

 

I view qigong as somewhere between carpentry and serious contemplation. It's more spiritual than carpentry but less spiritual than contemplation. The experiences qigong produces are quickly boxed in by the qigong mindset that is attached to pretty much every system of qigong.

 

So yes, qigong experience can help with wisdom, as can any spiritual or non-normal experience. Nonetheless, experience by itself is not enough to remove preconceptions. Preconceptions have to be challenged in contemplation, and the only way to do so is to have a very specific and sincere aspiration. The aspiration has to be aimed at the highest wisdom and the ultimate truth of experience and nothing less will do the trick.

 

There are ways to get all the same results as in qi gong without the limitations of qi gong. That's accomplishable by anyone who understands the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense.

 

A dumb yet fastidious and determined person can build a combustion engine based on a schematic. By someone who understands laws of physics at a more general level can build an infinite multitude of engines of which combustion engines are a subclass, and such person can build many different combustion engines instead of just one.

 

I agree with you. But what about the poor sod who doesn't "understand the general principles and truths behind phenomenal manifestations and intent in a very broad and deep sense"? Again I will emphasize that proper qigong teaches this.

 

Think of it like training wheels. First we give ourselves a narrow set of guidelines in which to grow and learn.

 

I don't buy this. The phrase "we give" implies a conscious and aware choice. It implies you know everything is a play of the ultimate mind, and yet you knowingly choose to accept certain limitations in a playful and tentative manner for the purpose of learning and for the purpose of achieving a well defined result which is very close to being something concrete (as opposed to being abstract). Is this what goes on in qigong?

 

Then as our ability to maintain our own equilibrium develops and our knowledge of the principles grows we can do away with the training wheels and ride under our own steam.

 

This doesn't sound right to me. It almost sounds like some kind of effort or struggle is involved the way you describe it. You're comparing it to a bike, which is telling. A bike is a conceptualized and therefore structured experience. Controlling it means playing by the rules of the structures. This is also what we call a mundane experience. Any experience that doesn't know about de-structuring is a mundane experience. It is especially true if you believe the structure to be self-existent and independent of the state of your own mind.

 

As for the poor sod question, I'll say this. No one is really a poor sod, and especially in spirituality. Chemistry labs cost money. Physics labs cost money. Spiritual practice is one of the very few realms of study that doesn't require anything you don't already have with you at all times other than attention and intent (aspiration). So what is poor sod to do? It depends on what the poor sod wants. If the poor sod wants specific well defined results, by all means the poor sod should engage in the appropriate practice that has the best chance to give those results. If the poor sod wants to go beyond results, in other words, if you want to go from being a Mickey Mouse to being a cartoonist, you need a different approach. Specifically you need to have the proper aspiration and you need to have a fearlessly and relentlessly questioning and investigating mind.

 

Intent is very important. To use an example from history, Mogallana made a vow in one of his previous lives to develop supernormal abilities after an encounter with a powerful mystic. As a result, in Buddha's time he was foremost in supernormal abilities. On the other hand Sariputta didn't care about supernormal abilities. So as a result, even though Sariputta was every bit as enlightened as Mogallana, and in fact he was considered wiser than Mogallana, he had either no or very little supernormal power.

 

So it's kind of simple and fair: you get what you intend to get. If you want results you get results. If you want wisdom you get wisdom. Wisdom is vastly superior to any and all results. In fact, it is precisely bondage to results that keeps us enslaved to this and other similar planes of existence. It's not that results are bad. It's the thinking that there is nothing of higher worth than results that's the problem.

 

In any case, it's not really a problem for everyone. Many people are happy to be bound. They like the results they get and don't want anything else. I have nothing to say to such people.

 

Same thing ... we learn a specific set of practices that both teach us the fundamental principles and gives us the benefits of the practice. Eventually, with due practice, we understand the general principles and understand the uses of intent and then we can "free-wheel" it on our own and don't necessarily have to conform to or depend on the narrow practices any more.

 

So it seems you need a lot of years of hard labor to get to my starting point. I mean, I start there! It's like in Zen: you start with enlightenment. You don't start at the bottom and work your way up like a dutiful grunt.

 

It's also like learning music (or anything really) ... first you learn the scales and you diligently practice the classics of the masters. Then, when you have enough understanding of the principles, you can compose your own music.

 

Playing music is a structured activity. Besides, one school of thought says you should learn scales first and improvisation is the final step. Another school of thought says that improvisation is the first step, then playing patterned songs is next, and finally to get that boost in speed you learn scales last.

 

If you think about it, learning scales as the first thing is dumb actually. It's a very boring, mechanical drill that's aimed to teach speed. Speed is only useful when you want to play something advanced. Why would a beginner need to worry about speed?

 

The practice of scales and the forms that have been created by the Masters that have come before us comes first though.

 

They're also known as idiots. Masters are not flawless. They are subject to stupidity and error. Remember that story in Chuang Tzu about the shaman who could divine things accurately, who had flashy abilities, and his encounter with an unassuming Taoist master who didn't demonstrate any abilities? One never knows who is a master. To know truly who is a master you yourself must be a master. You can only know up to your own level of ignorance.

 

Qi gong is deluded in the sense that when people learn one recipe, they can certainly show amazing results because a tasty recipe is still a tasty recipe, but then they pretend to be a chef, which is a different category of a sentient being with different aspirations from someone who studies qi gong.

 

This is a rash and ill-considered judgement. You are saying that because a few people falsely claim to be qigong masters when they have only learned one form then all qigong is delusional.

 

No. What I am saying is that even if you know 10,000 recipes you're not a chef. A chef is someone who understands the principles of cooking. A person can learn 10,000 recipes without ever learning any principles of cooking. With that many recipes you can fool anyone except a real chef.

 

And in any case, recipes are valuable. Just because being a chef is vastly better doesn't mean recipes have no worth at all.

 

It would be like me saying: "All music is deluded because there are people who learn to play one song well and then pretend to be world-class musicians."

 

No, it would be like saying someone who plays sheet music is not a world-class musician even if you can play 10,000 different songs from the sheet. A jazz player who can't even play one song from a sheet can be a master musician though.

 

Mastering conformity is not true mastery. When you follow the pattern on a sheet, that's an exercise in conformity. No one ever became very wise by conforming to patterns. Sure, you can learn something, so it's not a waste of time, but there are other ways.

 

 

Any rational person would view that statement as BS ... yours falls into the same category.

...

...

When building an internal combustion piston engine, is the piston optional?

 

Funny you ask: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wankel_engine

 

You know, I respect a lot of things you say too, but sometimes you can be as dumb as a box of rocks.

Edited November 22, 2010 by goldisheavy

[ralis]

I look forward to your post, and in what way you mean non-linear, as well as to the source of your information. I find it a worthwhile question even if I anticipate it to be short-lived.

 

More than 3 variables. X to the 3rd etc. Not easily quantified due to variables interacting with each other. Complex systems which are fractal in nature.

 

The human energy field is a fractal. See the work of Dr. Valerie Hunt

[Stigweard]

You know, I respect a lot of things you say too, but sometimes you can be as dumb as a box of rocks.

 

 

I'll show you my rock collection if you be nice

 

I agree. Qi gong has *some* value in wisdom development. I should have said it's not focused on wisdom.

 

Again depends on your definition of wisdom. Wisdom at its roots means "to see," hence "to know". Qigong practice teaches you to "see" the energetic make-up of oneself and one's world. That sort of direct knowing is closer to the truth than any sit-on-your-ass contemplation.

 

So it seems you need a lot of years of hard labor to get to my starting point. I mean, I start there! It's like in Zen: you start with enlightenment. You don't start at the bottom and work your way up like a dutiful grunt.

You see the trouble you have yourself in here is that you think you already know something. You think you know what qigong is all about without ever actually having done it. By assuming you know you preclude yourself from learning.

 

Learning and achievement is progressive development.

 

Playing music is a structured activity. Besides, one school of thought says you should learn scales first and improvisation is the final step. Another school of thought says that improvisation is the first step, then playing patterned songs is next, and finally to get that boost in speed you learn scales last.

 

If you think about it, learning scales as the first thing is dumb actually. It's a very boring, mechanical drill that's aimed to teach speed. Speed is only useful when you want to play something advanced. Why would a beginner need to worry about speed?

 

No. What I am saying is that even if you know 10,000 recipes you're not a chef. A chef is someone who understands the principles of cooking. A person can learn 10,000 recipes without ever learning any principles of cooking. With that many recipes you can fool anyone except a real chef.

 

And in any case, recipes are valuable. Just because being a chef is vastly better doesn't mean recipes have no worth at all.

 

No, it would be like saying someone who plays sheet music is not a world-class musician even if you can play 10,000 different songs from the sheet. A jazz player who can't even play one song from a sheet can be a master musician though.

 

Mastering conformity is not true mastery. When you follow the pattern on a sheet, that's an exercise in conformity. No one ever became very wise by conforming to patterns. Sure, you can learn something, so it's not a waste of time, but there are other ways.

Here I concede to what you are saying and agree with you. The way I teach Kung Fu is by learning principles of movement and interaction through hours of improvised movement drills. However, just as form and formless originate each other, I also make sure students learn the traditional forms and drills (i.e. the recipes).

 

Let's use your examples then ... perhaps the Jazz player is a good one.

 

The musician still has to learn and understand the basic principles of music in order to play music. They still have to understand pitch, rhythm, timbre, dynamics, melody, harmony, tempo, rhythmic-pattern, metre, unity, symmetry, tension-relaxation etc. So there are some basic constants in music you need to learn whether you learn via free-form improvisation or whether you learn via structured form-work.

 

Qigong is the same and the principles include breathing, posture, relaxation, unity of movement, symmetry, tempo, awareness, intent, internal stillness, working with the basic framework and rhythmic patterns of the human and environmental energy changes (i.e. wuxing, yijing) etc.

 

So yes, if you were to adhere to the fundamental principles of qigong, then you could achieve the results without having to conform to the forms. The very big "however" is whether or not you can learn these correct principles on your own without either a teacher or without a qigong form to practice with.

[goldisheavy]

 

I'll show you my rock collection if you be nice

 

You'll be the judge.

 

Again depends on your definition of wisdom. Wisdom at its roots means "to see," hence "to know". Qigong practice teaches you to "see" the energetic make-up of oneself and one's world. That sort of direct knowing is closer to the truth than any sit-on-your-ass contemplation.

 

Direct knowing is what I call direct delusion. It presupposes the idea that some types of knowing are indirect, hence some others are direct. This is a delusion at the ultimate level of insight. Of course since you are a qigong busybody this doesn't occur to you.

 

You see the trouble you have yourself in here is that you think you already know something.

 

That's true. I do know something. Admitting to knowing something is not exactly admitting to much though.

 

You think you know what qigong is all about without ever actually having done it. By assuming you know you preclude yourself from learning.

 

Well, how do I know I haven't done qigong if I don't know what qigong is all about?

 

Learning and achievement is progressive development.

 

Progressive development is a very valuable idea. If you combine progressive development with sudden non-development, you can get interesting results too. Sudden non-development also has value.

 

And besides, it's not like contemplation is necessarily easy. I would say depending on what you enjoy it can be as hard or as easy as any other activity. If you don't enjoy considering things deeply and holistically with a questioning frame of mind, contemplation can be a nasty chore. How long do you think life-transforming contemplation takes? xabir says 3 years. I say it can be a longer time, like 20 years or more. It could be shorter than that. But it's not one day and it doesn't fall down on you on silver platter either.

 

Ignorance is caused by ignoring and becoming aware of that which you were heretofore ignoring is not a trivial endeavor because things we are ignoring are naturally hard to notice.

 

Contemplation is no idle navel-gazing.

 

musician still has to learn and understand the basic principles of music in order to play music. They still have to understand pitch, rhythm, timbre, dynamics, melody, harmony, tempo, rhythmic-pattern, metre, unity, symmetry, tension-relaxation etc. So there are some basic constants in music you need to learn whether you learn via free-form improvisation or whether you learn via structured form-work.

 

That's true because music is structured in your definition music. There are some musicians who have transcended this kind of music though. For example, I know one musician who can spin the dial of a radio and hear music in the noises the radio makes while the dial is being spun back and forth randomly. Oh, by the way, he has a very instructive nickname: "square pusher." Do you know what it means? A square is a person like you. You might want to look it up. And a square pusher is someone who pushes the prison-like boundaries of the squares.

 

 

 

The bit about the radio I read in one of the interviews of him.

Edited November 22, 2010 by goldisheavy

[forestofemptiness]

GIH's fake acupuncture story:

 

Fake Acupuncture Story

[SeriesOfTubes]

Squarepusher (Tom Jenkinson) may have transcended musical form but he is a jazz bassist by training who discovered electronic music later. One of my favorites for jungle/experimental DNB. I remember in the 90s there were some people who believed he was the incarnation of Miles Davis. I've had the pleasure of seeing him live. Among other things, he hooks up his bass with midi pickup going to sampler/synths that allow him to connect any sound to what he is playing on the fretboard.. sickness ensues.

 

Im pretty sure all of the jazz greats had to have some music theory. Most of the classic Jazz tunes that they get together and play are old Broadway tunes believe it or not. Gershwin, Rogers and Hammerstein. (Cherokee, All The Things You are etc) Most of the "improv" soloing is done off of either the melody line, of which note reading would be required or four voice arpeggios (four note chords, notes played individually) . So at the very least to hang with a band you would need to understand major, minor, and dominant, never mind modes. The bare minimum, lowest common denominator when learning jazz is learning to improv the blues pattern played with 7th chords which are four voice. Improv in jazz is kind of a misnomer when you consider the training involved plus the complex chord patterns and melody already exist, usually played out of "The Real Book" an illegally distributed collection of jazz standards sheet music. You really wouldn't get together to play jazz with anyone without a copy.

 

I've heard of one jazz guitarist whose name eludes me, who for some odd or autistic reason did not really understand the concept of chords, and so he played each note of the chord separately, insane.

Edited November 22, 2010 by SeriesOfTubes

[SeriesOfTubes]

GIH's fake acupuncture story:

 

Fake Acupuncture Story

 

I would suggest that this has more to do with the power of suggestibility at the placebo level than the actual efficacy of acupuncture. The placebo in that study is sort of riding the coat tails of acupuncture in the minds of the subjects. I mean those results probably wouldn't be effective without the reputation and perceived credibility of acupuncture.

 

Every form of health intervention can have a placebo effect as an additive to what it actually does. There's several studies that show psychiatric placebo performs nearly as well as certain forms of psychotherapy. Placebo surgery has been shown to be effective with people raised in western "medical culture". In a classic study published in the Journal of Psychosomatic Medicine in 1969 referenced here, placebo suggestibility was empirically isolated from hypnotic suggestibility in the treatment of pain.

Edited November 22, 2010 by SeriesOfTubes

[idquest]

Squarepusher (Tom Jenkinson) may have transcended musical form but he is a jazz bassist by training who discovered electronic music later. One of my favorites for jungle/experimental DNB. I remember in the 90s there were some people who believed he was the incarnation of Miles Davis. I've had the pleasure of seeing him live. Among other things, he hooks up his bass with midi pickup going to sampler/synths that allow him to connect any sound to what he is playing on the fretboard.. sickness ensues.

 

Im pretty sure all of the jazz greats had to have some music theory. Most of the classic Jazz tunes that they get together and play are old Broadway tunes believe it or not. Gershwin, Rogers and Hammerstein. (Cherokee, All The Things You are etc) Most of the "improv" soloing is done off of either the melody line, of which note reading would be required or four voice arpeggios (four note chords, notes played individually) . So at the very least to hang with a band you would need to understand major, minor, and dominant, never mind modes. The bare minimum, lowest common denominator when learning jazz is learning to improv the blues pattern played with 7th chords which are four voice. Improv in jazz is kind of a misnomer when you consider the training involved plus the complex chord patterns and melody already exist, usually played out of "The Real Book" an illegally distributed collection of jazz standards sheet music. You really wouldn't get together to play jazz with anyone without a copy.

 

I've heard of one jazz guitarist whose name eludes me, who for some odd or autistic reason did not really understand the concept of chords, and so he played each note of the chord separately, insane.

Haha,

Spot on...

[simply puzzled]

Yea thats exactely what I was thinking, all this stuff developed over thousands of years due to diligent research, practice and study, its not abitrary, rather its a highly developed system based upon lots of work.

 

One of the things I have found interesting about studying shamanism around the world is that there are remarkable commonalities between them. There is one or more underworlds below us where most people go when they die, and there are one or more heavens above us where specially revered elders or gods or anthropomorphic being representing natural forces live. There is some sort of pole or tree connecting them, and it's the job of the shaman to move between them. But there are also important differences. Very important ones. And these are not the sort of theological disputes between Lutherans and Episcopalians on the nature of the priesthood. Shamans, quite literally, live and work in these realms and move between them every day. They are very, very real.

 

So, in one sense, you could say that the number of heaven realms is completely arbitrary, because some shamans work in one and others have seven and other have more or fewer. And, in another sense, they really aren't arbitrary, because for each shaman, working in that world, it's exactly how many heavenly planes exist.

 

If you were to ask a ceremonial magician to map out the body, he'd probably draw a figure with energy points corresponding to a Jewish mystical diagram called "The Tree of Life." This system isn't new. It was developed over thousands of years, and it doesn't align well with the chakras. And, having worked in that system, I can say that it functions very, very well.

 

So, I get what the person you are responding to was saying: in one sense it's arbitrary because different systems seem to each work. In another sense though, simply deciding tomorrow that my energy center was in my left eye would probably yield poor results. Systems like Qigong and Ceremonial Magic seem to wear a groove in the Universe. Someone finds a path, and they get disciples to follow them, and that whole gang tramples through the universe, breaking down the plants and eroding the soil until pretty soon, it creates a groove that you can slip into and follow. And once you're in that groove, all sorts of things start to happen that are really real for the people there in that place. What you discover is no longer arbitrary.

 

Just my two cents.

[joeblast]

Squarepusher (Tom Jenkinson) may have transcended musical form but he is a jazz bassist by training who discovered electronic music later. One of my favorites for jungle/experimental DNB. I remember in the 90s there were some people who believed he was the incarnation of Miles Davis. I've had the pleasure of seeing him live. Among other things, he hooks up his bass with midi pickup going to sampler/synths that allow him to connect any sound to what he is playing on the fretboard.. sickness ensues.

 

Im pretty sure all of the jazz greats had to have some music theory. Most of the classic Jazz tunes that they get together and play are old Broadway tunes believe it or not. Gershwin, Rogers and Hammerstein. (Cherokee, All The Things You are etc) Most of the "improv" soloing is done off of either the melody line, of which note reading would be required or four voice arpeggios (four note chords, notes played individually) . So at the very least to hang with a band you would need to understand major, minor, and dominant, never mind modes. The bare minimum, lowest common denominator when learning jazz is learning to improv the blues pattern played with 7th chords which are four voice. Improv in jazz is kind of a misnomer when you consider the training involved plus the complex chord patterns and melody already exist, usually played out of "The Real Book" an illegally distributed collection of jazz standards sheet music. You really wouldn't get together to play jazz with anyone without a copy.

 

I've heard of one jazz guitarist whose name eludes me, who for some odd or autistic reason did not really understand the concept of chords, and so he played each note of the chord separately, insane.

 

yep. as such a lot of my moving qigong is comprised of all I've experienced, from pt to xingshenzhuang to 8 brocades to baguataichi...

 

of course there's fundamentals, but often when we feel the need to write our own music, those fundamentals spring forth amongst the myriad colors of the tapestry, essence is kept while spontaneity flourishes. _/\_

 

other things however...I most certainly dont follow whatever it is I feel like in doing neigung activities

[pilot]

More than 3 variables. X to the 3rd etc. Not easily quantified due to variables interacting with each other. Complex systems which are fractal in nature.

 

The human energy field is a fractal. See the work of Dr. Valerie Hunt

Thanks for the source, I will check it out if I come across it.

 

However fractal or at what level, I will keep to the original higher level-anatomy as described (presumably by people so skilled as to feel it and its effects directly) as it relates to traditional Qigong. I think what is more concerning and practical is how different people respond to different Qigong methods by way of inherent (minor) natural variations; this I believe to be addressed by trying different methods and customizing them to fit your own higher-level anatomy. So, it is hard to invalidate different forms of qigong in hopes of synthesizing that which is most effective (or discontinuing that which is entirely redundant or inert) without first accounting for that minor natural variation.

 

I'm still experimenting with different things myself, but theory is sometimes helpful to avoid completely frying yourself or wasting your energy and time in nonsense.

[Jetsun]

I think Qigong which goes on about storing Qi is BS, surely what you want is free flowing Qi letting go of any points of stagnation so it can come and go naturally, not gathering it all and storing it in your body like its a treasure to be preserved and protected